Re: Problem with test pp28

Thanks Greg. That makes sense, and I see that in the definition now, but some of the text in the doc may be a bit misleading:

"There is also a "zero or one" connectivity property path operator, ?." ... "Such connectivity matching does not introduce duplicates (it does not incorporate any count of the number of ways the connection can be made) even if the repeated path itself would otherwise result in duplicates."

I know we already approved all of this stuff, so I'm not suggesting that we change anything at this point.

Cheers,
Matt

On 6/11/2012 3:44 PM, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Matthew Perry wrote:
>
>> I think property path test pp28 may have an error. If '?' is a connectivity operator, then how is :z in the result twice?
> '?' isn't just a connectivity operator -- it just adds results (the zero-length path results) to the path it is applied to (in this case, ':p/:p'). And since :p/:p just expands to a BGP, you get the doubled results since :z can be reached twice from :a (through either :b or :c).
>
> .greg
>

Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 20:42:20 UTC